Agenda item

Items of Urgent Business Authorised by the Chairman

Minutes:

Prior to discussion, Councillor Hall declared an interest in this item, as she was a governor at the school and a councillor for Skerton East ward.

 

Councillor Aitchison also declared an interest, the nature of it being that he had undertaken work experience at the school.

 

The Chairman authorised an item of urgent business on Lancashire County Council’s consultation on the possible closure of Skerton Community High School (SCHS), Owen Road, Lancaster.  The consultation had been received after the publication of the agenda, and a response was required before the next meeting of the Committee.

 

In the course of discussion, members agreed that the Council should submit a response to the consultation, citing the fact that many pupils had special educational needs and disabilities (SEND), which SCHS was particularly adept at catering for.   Concern was expressed that children with SEND may struggle in other, larger, schools and that whilst SCHS proved more expensive per child than other schools in the area, the extra expense was justified by the level of pastoral care and specialist provision.

 

Members were also concerned about the effect on the local community of closing the school, particularly in light of Skerton Primary School’s closure in 2010.  In addition, councillors were concerned about future provision as there was a significant amount of housing development taking place in the area.  It was suggested that the number of houses being built in the area be incorporated into the Council’s response.

 

Councillor Hall, seconded by Councillor Knight, proposed that the Council use the following statement as the basis of a response to the consultation:

 

The Committee recommends that Lancaster City Council (LCC) submit a formal response to the consultation to include the following points:

 

LCC has made a considerable investment in Skerton in recent years.  Following receipt of a grant in recognition of Skerton being a deprived area, a project called Connecting Communities was launched in 2010, facilitated by LCC’s Community Engagement service.  This involve a substantial amount of officer time and amongst other outcomes resulted in the formation of The Friends of Ryelands Park.  During the same period Lancashire County Council have closed Skerton Primary School and the Luneside Resource Centre.   The closure of yet another public building in such close proximity would send out a very conflicting message about the future of Skerton as a community.

 

As the planning authority, LCC is very aware of the shortage of housing in the district and how many hundreds of homes could be built over the next few years.  Additional homes are currently being built on Pinfold Lane and Ashbourne Road in Skerton.,  The children who live in these houses will need schools.  When considered alongside the current shortage in primary school places, it is a concern to LCC that the decision to close Skerton High School would be a very short term one.

 

As the local authority, LCC assumes a responsibility for health and wellbeing in the district.  LCC expresses concern about the future education and wellbeing of the children who currently attend Skerton High, given the unique environment the school provides, and asks how the needs of those children will be met elsewhere in the district.  In view of the very high proportion of vulnerable children and children with very particular needs (52.9%) who attend Skerton High, this is a worrying concern and has not clearly been addressed in the consultation documents. 

 

In view of the above considerations, LCC does not support the proposed closure of Skerton Community High School.

 

On being put to the vote, the proposal was agreed unanimously.

 

Resolved:

 

That a response be submitted to the consultation.  The response would be written by officers in consultation with the Chairman, and submitted with copies sent to the Committee members for information.

 

The response would be based on comments expressed at the meeting and Councillor Hall’s statement, as set out above.

Supporting documents: